ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
Chapter 10. Seaport
The Port of Oakland (Port) is an autonomous department of the City of Oakland. The Port
manages property along 20 miles of the eastern shore of San Francisco Bay and is divided into
three operating units: Maritime, which owns and operates the Seaport; Aviation, which owns
and operates Oakland International Airport; Commercial Real Estate, which owns property
along the shoreline. The Port was officially established in 1927 under the direct control of the
Board of Port Commissioners. As an independent department, the Port funds its own
operations and receives no tax revenues from the city. The Port is located to the west of
Interstate 880 and south of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (Interstate 80). The residential
and industrial community of West Oakland is located immediately to the east, and downtown
Oakland, the Bay Area’s second largest central business district, is located to the northeast.
The Seaport is landlord-based, meaning it owns and builds most of the port infrastructure, but
private shipping companies are responsible for operations at the terminals they lease. The Port
is made up of a number of facilities, including
• Shipping berths, container storage areas, and intermodal rail facilities, which constitute
approximately 1,200 acres
• Four major terminal areas, which together total 775 acres:
o Outer Harbor Terminal Area
o 7th Street Terminal Area
o Middle Harbor Terminal Area
o Inner Harbor Area
• 20 deep water berths (depths of 50 feet)
• 36 container gantry cranes (30 are post-Panamax types)
• Two intermodal rail yards:
o Oakland International Gateway (OIG), operated by Burlington Northern Santa
Fe on Port-owned land
o Railport, owned and operated by Union Pacific Railroad on adjacent private
property
• Oakland Army Base – while not officially part of the Port, some ancillary Port services
take place on the former Oakland Army Base, also referred to as the “backland”
Exposure
Exposure is the extent to which an asset experiences a specific climate impact such as storm
event flooding, tidal inundation, or elevated groundwater. The exposure of the Seaport to two
sea level rise projections and three Bay water levels was evaluated using two different
approaches. The two sea level rise projections, 16 inches (40 cm) and 55 inches (140 cm),
correlate approximately to mid- and end-of-century. These two sea level rise projections were
coupled with three Bay water levels: the new daily high tide, measured as mean higher high
water (MHHW), the new 100-year extreme water level, also known as the 100-year stillwater
elevation, and the 100-year extreme water level coupled with wind waves, hereafter :”storm
event with wind waves,” or “wind waves.” These water levels were selected because they
represent a reasonable range of potential Bay conditions that will affect flooding and inundation
along the shoreline. For more information about sea level rise projections and Bay water levels
evaluated see Chapters 1 and 2.
For each of the water levels, the exposure of selected facilities within and associated with the
Port of Oakland was evaluated. As shown in Table 1, the Port is not exposed to the daily high
tide or storm event flooding with 16 inches of sea level rise, although portions of two terminal
areas, the Union Pacific Railport, and some of the Oakland Army Base are exposed to wind
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
waves. With 55 inches of sea level rise, parts of the Railport, Oakland Army Base, and portions
of rail track are exposed to the daily high tide; these areas and parts of the Outer Harbor
Terminal Area are exposed to storm event flooding, and all of the selected Port assets except for
the 7th Street Terminal Area and Oakland International Gateway are exposed to wind waves.
Table 1. Selected Port assets exposed to wind waves with 16 inches of sea level rise, and daily high tide
and storm events with 55 inches of sea level rise. No areas are exposed to the daily high tide or storm
event flooding with 16 inches of sea level rise.
55” SLR
16” SLR
Storm Event
Port Asset / Area
Outer Harbor
Terminal Area
Areas
exposed to
wind waves
only
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
20-37
Daily High
Tide
Areas
exposed
Storm Event
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
20-37
Areas
exposed to
wind waves
only
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
20-37
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
60-68
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
55-59
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
60-68
Areas
exposed
7 th Street Terminal
Area
Middle Harbor
Terminal Area
Inner Harbor Area
Parts of
Terminal,
incl. Berths
60-68
Oakland
International
Gateway
Union Pacific
Railport
Parts of
Parts of
Parts of
Parts of
Railport
Railport
Railport
Railport
Parts of Port Parts of Port Many Port
Many Port
Oakland Army Base
areas on
areas on
areas on
areas on
Base
Base
Base
Base
Tracks south Tracks north Tracks north
Rail Tracks serving
of Port near and south of and south of
Port
Lake Merritt
Port
Port
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 2
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
Sensitivity and Adaptive Capacity
The sensitivity and adaptive capacity of the Port was assessed for three potential climate
impacts that could occur due to sea level rise and storm events. The three climate impacts
considered are:
•
•
•
More frequent floods or floods that last longer due to storm events
Permanent or frequent inundation by the daily high tide
Elevated groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion
Sensitivity is the degree to which an asset or entire system (e.g., particular terminals or related
services such as rail and roads) would be physically or functionally impaired if exposed to a
climate impact. Adaptive capacity is the ability for an asset or system to accommodate or adjust
to a climate impact and maintain or quickly resume its primary function. The sensitivity and
adaptive capacity of the Port was evaluated, considering not just physical sensitivity, but also
functional sensitivity and the sensitivity of the regional goods movement network.
Rising groundwater could increase the potential for liquefaction-induced damage. The seaport
is located on sandy Bay fills which are subject to liquefaction. Damage to facilities at the Port of
Oakland in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake was due primarily to liquefaction of the hydraulic
fill (ABAG 2001). All of the terminals were affected, with the most extensive damage to the
Seventh Street Terminal (Berths 35-38). Ground acceleration at the Port caused widespread
liquefaction and sand boils in several terminals, resulting in up to one foot of settlement and
distress to backland pavement, utilities, and small buildings. The damage to wharf structures at
the Seventh Street Terminal was severe enough to close the terminal for several months and
reduce its operations for over a year until emergency repairs were completed.
Redundancy and excess capacity at the seaport can help reduce potential impacts of sea level
rise if terminal areas and/or berths are temporarily impaired. At its present size and with its
existing rail infrastructure, the Port is projected to have adequate capacity through 2021 (Tioga
Group 2009). Infrastructure improvements on rail and road connections would enable the Port
to meet forecast demand through 2030. Thus, the Port of Oakland is not faced with immediate
capacity constraints based on projected cargo demand and could potentially absorb additional
goods movement at its other terminals should one be rendered inoperable. This sort of adaptive
capacity was observed when the Loma Prieta Earthquake forced the closure of the 7th Street
Terminal for over a year. The ability of other terminals to compensate for the temporary closure
of other parts of the Port is only possible when impacts are confined to small areas.
Some Port assets are not directly exposed to tidal inundation or storm event flooding with sea
level rise, but are sensitive to potential impacts on the terminal areas’ substructure support
systems. Terminal decks are supported by concrete pilings embedded in a rock dike
embankment that slopes down to the terminal water depth, which ranges from 42 to 50 feet
below mean lower low water. The potential for these structures to be exposed to more climate
impacts could compromise their integrity, leading to increased damage and maintenance costs.
An example of indirect climate impacts comes from the Port of Los Angeles, which predicts that
an increase in sea levels would affect its storm drain system (Vera 2009), which would act as a
conduit for sea water, flooding the terminals and surrounding streets.
Regular maintenance and the ability to quickly repair damaged facilities could contribute to the
adaptive capacity of terminal areas and substructure support systems, but operations and
maintenance costs are very high and the financial mechanisms to improve seaport
infrastructure are complicated. In its five year 2012-2016 Capital Needs Assessment, the seaport
budgets $146 million for maritime projects (Port of Oakland 2011). About two-thirds of this total
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 3
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
is to come from Port-generated cash and must be used to pay for operations, debt service, and
other obligations first, with any remainder to fund capital projects. The remaining one-third of
the budget is expected to come from grants from government agencies including the Federal
Maritime Administration, California Air Resources Board, Bay Area Air Quality Management
District, and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The high cost of budgeted
infrastructure improvements does not include protecting against future sea level rise and
flooding impacts. Such protection would increase budgets substantially – for example, the Port
of Los Angeles estimates that hardening its terminals and berths to withstand projected mid- to
end-of-century sea level rise would cost 25% more than current upgrade costs (Rand 2011).
The seaport is dependent on berths and terminals to dock shipping vessels and unload their
cargo and also on the adjacent rail yards and freeways that carry those goods to other parts of
the region, state, and country. Thirty percent of goods moving into and out of the Port are
transported by rail (Port of Oakland 2008). As noted in Table 1, portions of track and other rail
assets that serve the Port are exposed to wind waves with 16 inches of sea level rise, and all Bay
water levels with 55 inches of sea level rise.
The rail system that serves the Port of Oakland cannot function when flooded. Inspection and
work pits at railroad maintenance facilities have pumping equipment meant to keep them dry
in the event of storm event flooding or groundwater intrusion. However, this pumping
equipment has limited capacity so its effectiveness would depend on the severity of flooding.
While the tracks could return to use quickly after a floodwaters recede, frequent inundation
would result in unacceptable delays, essentially forcing the system’s infrastructure to either be
upgraded or abandoned. To improve the adaptive capacity of the asset to withstand flooding
events, the existing right-of-way could be used to build a higher railbed. However, raising the
railroad requires related structures to be raised, which would be difficult if not impossible
without complete reconstruction.
Seventy percent of the goods moving into and out of the Port are transported by truck to
Interstate 880, the primary freeway that connects the Port with points south such as San Jose
and Silicon Valley. The segment of I-880 between Oak Street and 23rd Avenueis exposed to
inundation from all scenarios except the daily high tide with 16 inches of sea level rise. While
trucks could be re-routed in the event of flooding on I-880, this would have impacts on local
neighborhoods.
The function of the Port is extremely sensitive to disruption because of the nature of the goods
exported. The top commodities exported in 2010 were fresh fruits and nuts and meat products,
accounting for over 33% of the total export value (Port of Oakland 2011). These perishable
products require quick transport between their source and the market and cannot tolerate
delays or the inability to access the Port. Transport of California’s agricultural products does
have some adaptive capacity. Ninety-nine percent of containerized goods moving through
northern California travel through the Port of Oakland, but the Port of Richmond and the Port
of San Francisco have the infrastructure in place to handle containerized goods. However, these
ports do not currently handle such goods and do not have the capacity of the Port of Oakland.
Further, these ports have a maximum water depth of 38’ and cannot handle the largest
container ships that Oakland’s 50’ channels can.
Consequences
The potential consequences of sea level rise are considered for the Port and supporting
transportation infrastructure. Consequences are the magnitude of the effects on the economy,
society, environment, and governance if an impact occurs. Factors that inform the magnitude of
the potential consequences include: the type and severity of the impact on O&M or capital
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 4
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
improvement costs; the size and demographics of affected communities; the potential impact on
employers and employees; and the type of natural resources affected.
Economic
By number of annual TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units; a standardized size of the containers
in which goods are shipped), the Port of Oakland is the 3rd busiest container port on the West
Coast of the United States and the 5th busiest in the country. In 2010, 1,973 cargo vessels
imported over 2.33 million TEUs through the Port. Primary imports include machinery,
electrical equipment, knit apparel, furniture, and beverages, mostly from Asia. The Port’s
primary exports include fruits, nuts, and meats. In sum, over $39 billion worth of imports and
exports flowed through the Port in 2010.
In the Bay Area alone, this cargo activity generated 28,833 direct, induced, and indirect jobs
(Martin Associates 2011). Fifty-two percent of the direct jobs created by the Port are within
Alameda County, with nearly 20% in the City of Oakland. Eighty-seven percent of the direct
jobs are created within northern California. These jobs range from rail and truck operators to
unionized longshoremen to bar pilots. The average salary of a Port-related employee is $40,400,
better than the average wage of $37,890 for production workers in the Oakland-FremontHayward Metropolitan Area. In total, nearly 444,000 jobs are related, in some way, to the
movement of cargo at the Port of Oakland.
In addition to jobs, the revenue brought in by Port activity helps local businesses and
communities. In 2010, cargo handled at the Port supported about $2.2 billion of total personal
income, $2.1 billion in revenue for businesses providing maritime services for cargo and vessels,
and $233 million in state and local tax revenue. Each year, depending on the revenue surplus,
the Port makes financial contributions to the City of Oakland. Past large-scale disruptions have
had large monetary impacts to the Port. For example, a one-day closure of four berthing areas
caused an estimated loss of $4 million (Kuruvila 2011).
In addition to the direct economic losses from a disruption of the Port’s operations and facilities,
planned projects are expected to increase the economic role the Port of Oakland plays in
logistics in the Bay Area, state, and nation. The former Oakland Army Base closed in 1999, with
segments transferred to both the City of Oakland and the Port of Oakland. Redevelopment of
the site will entail three projects: Marine Terminal Redevelopment on Port-owned property;
construction of an Intermodal Rail Terminal also on Port-owned property; and construction of
Trade, Logistics, and Industrial Facilities on city-owned property. The Marine Terminal
Redevelopment project will entail facility improvements located at Terminals 20-26 in the
seaport’s Outer Harbor area. The Intermodal Rail Terminal will be located between Maritime
Street and Interstate 880 with the goal of increasing rail’s share of goods movement to and from
the seaport. Finally, the Trade, Logistics, and Industrial Facilities center will develop over 100
acres of land south of the Bay Bridge toll plaza and north of the Port of Oakland’s marine
terminal facilities into new industrial and cargo processing space for goods movement
companies. The City of Oakland hopes to attract manufacturing, research and development,
and green technology uses to this area.
The Oakland Army Base redevelopment projects are projected to create roughly 3,000 direct
jobs in the near term and 12,000 jobs over the next 20 years; generate $4 million per year for the
City of Oakland’s general fund; and improve air quality in West Oakland and adjacent
communities by reducing truck traffic. However, sea level rise and storm events may affect this
site. Much of the former Army Base will be exposed to wind waves with 16 and 55 inches of sea
level rise, and to the daily high tide and storm event flooding with 55 inches of sea level rise.
The potential for future inundation could prevent development or negatively affect businesses
as well as cargo movement if the project is completed as planned.
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 5
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
Society
The Port of Oakland is a key gateway for the export of California’s agricultural products. The
Port is unique among American ports in that, by volume, it exports more than it imports. More
than 60% of all California exports of beverages, spirits, vinegar, coffee and tea, fruits, nuts,
citrus, and melon leave the state through Oakland. In 2010, more than $10.1 billion in
California-made goods and commodities were shipped through the Port of Oakland,
representing over 29% of all exports produced in the state. In the absence of viable alternative
export points, disruptions to the Port of Oakland would seriously affect California’s agricultural
communities.
Because of the Port’s location adjacent to residential communities, it has major public health
impacts. Goods at the seaport are moved primarily by diesel trucks, which cause air quality
problems in the West Oakland community as well as increased traffic congestion on regional
freeways. Emissions from Oakland’s port operations, rail yards, and freeways cause diesel
particulate matter (PM) concentrations that are three times higher in West Oakland than the Bay
Area average. Additionally, 40 excess cancers per million residents of West Oakland are
attributed to seaport-related truck drayage, and diesel PM is responsible for higher premature
deaths and hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular disease, as well as asthmarelated and lower respiratory symptoms (CARB 2008). Diesel trucks are the greatest contributor
to these emissions, compared to trains, cargo handling equipment, and ocean going vessels. The
Port’s air quality goals include a reduction of excess community cancer risk caused from Portrelated diesel particulate matter by 85% from 2005 to 2020. A major initiative to achieve this
goal is to increase the amount of goods traveling by rail with the proposed Outer Harbor
Intermodal Terminal on the former Oakland Army Base. As discussed above, this area is
exposed to several sea level rise and storm event scenarios.
Environment
Port activities affect the surrounding environment with air emissions and noise. Any disruption
caused by sea level rise and storm events could prompt other ports to accept more
containerized goods. This could result in potential air quality, noise, and quality of life impacts
on the environment near these ports, particularly if construction is necessary to upgrade and
expand facilities.
Port property includes many sites that are contaminated with chemicals and substances toxic to
human health and the environment. For example, soil and groundwater near Berths 25 and 26
are listed by the State of California as being contaminated with volatile organic compounds),
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and metals. A Leaking Underground Storage Tank is located
near the old Albers Milling Company site at Berth 30 and includes gasoline contamination, and
former Oakland Army Base lands, contain significant amounts of metals, polychlorinated
biphenyls, and total petroleum hydrocarbon. Rising groundwater, tidal inundation, and storm
event flooding could cause the release of these contaminants, which could affect adjacent
wildlife habitat.
Governance
Many government agencies contribute to the Port’s operational and infrastructure decisions. As
an autonomous department of the City of Oakland, the Port’s Board of Port Commissioners has
primary control over the planning and development of its landside infrastructure. However,
any waterside development, including the expansion and renovation of its berthing facilities
and piers and the maintenance/deepening of harbor channels, is regulated by a complex web of
government agencies. The primary state and federal agencies and the laws they administer in
permitting such port development projects are:
•
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission administers the
McAteer-Petris Act’s requirement for permits that require Bay fill.
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 6
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
•
United States Army Corps of Engineers regulates the placement of dredged and/or fill
material into waters of the United States pursuant to the Clean Water Act. Also
maintains the Port’s primary federal channel.
•
United States Environmental Protection Agency oversees disposal of dredged material
and water quality pursuant to the Clean Water Act.
•
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board administers permits for water
quality pursuant to the Clean Water Act.
•
State Lands Commission has ownership of all state tidelands subject to the public trust
doctrine.
Additionally, the California Department of Fish and Game and United States Fish and Wildlife
Service issue takings permits when state and federally listed endangered species are known to
be affected by Port projects, as is the case with California Least Tern, salmonids, and herring in
the Bay. To protect water quality and endangered species, the Port is only allowed to dredge in
certain times of the year, known as “dredging windows” (LTMS 2001). The dredging window is
August 1 through November 30 of any given year. Should the Port need to dredge outside of
this window, it would need to engage in a lengthy permitting process through various resource
agencies to ensure that aquatic habitats are not disturbed.
Thus, the seaport’s ability to develop its infrastructure and protect against impacts from sea
level rise and storm events is complicated if development requires filling or dredging of the Bay.
Sea level rise may damage the Port’s facilities and result in shorter operational life spans of
critical infrastructure. The need for emergency repairs may also increase. With different
infrastructure investment needs and timeframes, the current regulatory structure that dictates
when and how to develop waterside seaport facilities may be inadequate to address future
circumstances.
Key Findings
The majority of seaport facilities are only exposed to the more extreme scenarios of 55 inches of
sea level rise with a storm event. Some infrastructure that is located under the wharves may be
exposed earlier than the rest of the seaport. Due to its location and nature, this infrastructure is
the most sensitive to storm events and may need to be moved as sea levels rise. Due to the lifecycle of seaport infrastructure, it is likely that most of the seaport facilities will be replaced or
significantly rehabilitated prior to this exposure and could be designed to reduce or eliminate
sea level rise and storm impacts. For these reasons, the seaport has low exposure and medium
to high adaptive capacity, provided that the financing is available to replace and rehabilitate
seaport facilities and factor in sea level rise and storms in those projects.
The primary vulnerability to the seaport will be to the rail system that moves cargo to and from
the seaport and the roadways that surround the seaport. The seaport is only able to function if
the rail and roadways that serve it are functional. Portions of both the rail and roadway systems
serving the seaport are exposed to sea level rise at 16 inches and this exposure increases with a
storm event. By 55 inches of sea level rise, the effects on system of rail and roadways that serve
the seaport are much greater. So, while the seaport facilities are not exposed at the earlier
scenarios and not very exposed at the later ones, the infrastructure that is critical to seaport
function – rail and road – is exposed and therefore the seaport function is vulnerable.
The seaport serves a significant role in the economy and society of the region. It is the primary
seaport in the region and creates a number of jobs and economic activity, both directly and
indirectly. The Port of Oakland's seaport moves agricultural and perishable products out of the
region, and California's agricultural industry relies on the seaport to move its goods. Any
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 7
ART Vulnerability and Risk Assessment Report
September 2012
disruption to seaport operations would have a significant effect on the region and the state. The
other seaports around the Bay Area – including Richmond, San Francisco, Redwood City – do
not have the capacity to meet the demand met at Oakland's seaport and therefore, the system
lacks redundancy.
It is important to recognize the societal and environmental consequences of flooding to the rail
or roadway systems that serve the seaport. If the rail system were to be affected, this would
result in an increased number of trucks necessary to move goods to and from the seaport. This
would have effects on the residential and commercial areas that already face health and quality
of life problems due to truck traffic and ancillary truck services through and in their
neighborhoods, as well as increased congestion on the surrounding interstates such as
Interstates 880, 238, and 80. A disruption to the roadway systems serving the seaport may
require rerouting of truck traffic through neighborhoods not designed to accommodate such
traffic.
References
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). 2001. The Real Dirt on Liquefaction: A Guide to
the Liquefaction Hazard in Future Earthquakes Affecting the San Francisco Bay Area.
www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/liquefac/Lq_rept.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Assessment
for the West Oakland Community.
www.arb.ca.gov/ch/communities/ra/westoakland/documents/westoaklandreport.pdf.
Kuruvila, M. 2011. Oakland council acts to sink Occupy port blockades. San Francisco Chronicle,
December 20, 2011.
Long Term Management Strategy (LTMS.) 2001. Long-Term Management Strategy
for the Placement of Dredged Material in the San Francisco Bay Region - Management Plan 2001.
http://www.spn.usace.army.mil/ltms2001/.
Martin Associates. 2011. The Positive Job Creation & Economic Impacts of the Port of Oakland.
Presented September 8, 2011. http://www.portofoakland.com/poweringjobs/.
Port of Oakland. 2008. TCIF Funding Nomination for the Outer Harbor Intermodal Terminals
(OHIT).
Port of Oakland. 2011. Strategic Plan, Fiscal Years 2011-2015.
www.portofoakland.com/pdf/2011_pbs_06.pdf.
Rand Corporation. 2011. Assessing the Need for Adaptation: The Port of Los
Angeles/RAND Corporation Study. Presented January 27, 2011.
Tioga Group. 2009. SF Bay Area Containerized Cargo Outlook. Prepared for San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission, July 2009.
Vera, R. 2009. Impacts and Responses to Sea Level Rise at the Port of Los Angeles. Masters
Thesis in Urban and Regional Planning, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona.
Chapter 10. Seaport – Page 8